Beresnevaité Margarita, Taylor Graeme J, Bagby R Michael
Laboratory of Clinical Cardiology, Group of Cardiac Rehabilitation and Secondary Prevention, Institute of Cardiology, Kaunas Medical University, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Psychother Psychosom. 2007;76(3):186-92. doi: 10.1159/000099846.
Despite increasing emphasis on using multiple methods to assess personality constructs in psychosomatic research, previous investigations of relations between alexithymia and type A behavior (TAB) have been limited by the use of single methods of measurement and almost no attempt to assess subcomponents of TAB. The aims of this study were to (1) evaluate levels of agreement between structured interview assessments of alexithymia, TAB, hostility, and time urgency and well-established self-report measures of these constructs, and (2) explore relations between alexithymia and TAB and its subcomponents in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD).
62 CHD patients were investigated 6 weeks after coronary angioplasty. Alexithymia was assessed with the Diagnostic Criteria for Psychosomatic Research (DCPR) and the 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20). TAB was assessed with the DCPR and the Short Form of the Jenkins Activity Survey Type A scale (JAS-SF). Time urgency was assessed with the DCPR and the Speed/Impatience scale of the Jenkins Activity Survey (JAS-S), and hostility was assessed with the DCPR and the Hostility subscale of the Revised Symptom Checklist-90 (SCL-HOS).
The DCPR classifications showed reasonably high levels of agreement with the TAS-20 and JAS-SF classifications of alexithymia and TAB, but lower levels of agreement in identifying patients with high hostility on the SCL-HOS and high time urgency on the JAS-S. Alexithymia measured by both the DCPR and the TAS-20 was unrelated to both self-report and structured interview measures of TAB, hostility, and time urgency.
The DCPR is a suitable screening instrument for assessing alexithymia and TAB, although the two constructs are unrelated.
尽管在身心研究中越来越强调使用多种方法来评估人格结构,但以往关于述情障碍与A型行为(TAB)之间关系的研究受到单一测量方法的限制,并且几乎没有尝试评估TAB的子成分。本研究的目的是:(1)评估结构化访谈对述情障碍、TAB、敌意和时间紧迫感的评估与这些结构的成熟自评量表之间的一致性水平;(2)探讨冠心病(CHD)患者述情障碍与TAB及其子成分之间的关系。
62例冠心病患者在冠状动脉血管成形术后6周接受调查。使用《身心研究诊断标准》(DCPR)和20项多伦多述情障碍量表(TAS - 20)评估述情障碍。使用DCPR和詹金斯活动调查问卷A型简表(JAS - SF)评估TAB。使用DCPR和詹金斯活动调查问卷的速度/不耐烦量表(JAS - S)评估时间紧迫感,使用DCPR和修订症状自评量表90的敌意分量表(SCL - HOS)评估敌意。
DCPR分类与TAS - 20和JAS - SF对述情障碍和TAB的分类显示出相当高的一致性水平,但在识别SCL - HOS上敌意高和JAS - S上时间紧迫感高的患者方面一致性水平较低。通过DCPR和TAS - 20测量的述情障碍与TAB、敌意和时间紧迫感的自评及结构化访谈测量均无关。
DCPR是评估述情障碍和TAB的合适筛查工具,尽管这两种结构不相关。